DOCSLIB.ORG

18 U.S.C. J 1349 26 U.S.C. J 7201 18 U.S.C. J 981(A)(1)(C) Systemax, Inc

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
18 U.S.C. J 1349 26 U.S.C. J 7201 18 U.S.C. J 981(A)(1)(C) Systemax, Inc Case 1:14-cr-20025-JEM Document 57 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/20/2014 Page 1 of 11 NOV 20, 2014 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA CASE NO. 14-20025-CR-JEM (s)(s) 18 U.S.C. j 1349 26 U.S.C. j 7201 18 U.S.C. j 981(a)(1)(C) UNITED STATES OF AM ERICA VS. CARL FIORENTINO, Defendant. / SECONP SVPERSEDING INFORM ATION The United States Attorney charges that: GENER AL ALLEGATIONS At times material to this Second Superseding lnform ation: Systemax, Inc. (t%systemax'') was a Delaware corporation with its principal place of business in Port W ashington, New York. Systemax sold personal computers and other consumer electronics through its websites, retail stores and direct mail catalogs. ln tiscal year 2010, Systemax had annual sales revenue of approximately $3.6 billion. Systemax was a public company and its common stock was traded on the New York Stock Exchange. Systemax was an issuer with a class of securities registered pursuant to Section 12 of the Sectuities and Exchange Act of 1934, and it was obligated to file reports with the U .S. Securities and Exchange Commission ($çSEC'') pursuant to Section 15(d) of the Act. 1 of 11 Case 1:14-cr-20025-JEM Document 57 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/20/2014 Page 2 of 11 2. TigerDirect was a subsidiary of Systemax with its principal place of business in Miami, Florida. TigerDirect was a part of the Teclmology Products Group ($tTPG'') of Systemax. TPG marktted and sold technology products under several brand names, including TigerDirect, CompUSA, and Circuit Uity. Defendant CARL FIORENTINO was a resident of Miami, Flolida and a senior executive of TigerDirect who used the title of President. CARL FIORENTINO had responsibility for negotiating and purchasing teclmology products from vendors who did business with TigerDirect. 4. Conspirator Gilbert Fiorentino was a resident of M iami, Florida, the Chief Executive Ofticer of TPG and TigerDirect, and a member of the Board of Diredors of Systemu . CARL FIORENTINO reported to his brother, Gilbert Fiorentino, and both worked at TigerDirect's Minmi offices. 5. As a public company, Systemax was required to comply with Section 404 of the Sarbanes-oxley Act of 2002, 15 U.S.C. j 7262, that required certain management personnel to sign annual contlict of interest questiormaires, certifications of compliance with Systemax's corporate ethics policy, and representations about transactions out of the course of ordinary business. These questionnaires included a representation whether the employee had tçreceiveld) or magdel any arrangements for the receipt of any compensation or other personal financial benetit from a current or potential supplier, competitor or customer'' of Systemax. CARL FIORENTINO and Gilbert Fiorentino periodically signed conflict of interest questiolmaires from 2005 through 201 1, and provided these to Systemax as part of the company's internal control over financial reporting. 2 of 11 Case 1:14-cr-20025-JEM Document 57 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/20/2014 Page 3 of 11 Pursuant to Regulation S-K, 17 C.F.R. j 229.404(c)(2)(ix), Systemax was required to disclose all compensation Gilbert Fiorentino received each tiscal year, including all personal benefits and property, unless the amount was less than $ 10,000. Regulation S-K, 17 C.F.R. j 229.404($, also required that Systemax provide a description of any transaction or series of transactions exceeding $120,000, to which Systemax was a party, and that Gilbert Fiorentino or CARL FIORENTINO had a direct or indirect financial interest. 8. E.K. was the principal of R.I., T.S. and C.O., all of which operated as one entity (collectively tçR.l.''). Between 2002 and 201 1, R.l. was a supplier of computer components to TigerDirect. R.I. sourced and purchased computer products in Asia and re-sold and delivered them to TigerDired at a markup. R.I. conducted nearly all of its sales with TigerDirect, had no other significant customers, and had more than $150 million in sales to TigerDirect during this time period. 9, The Internal Revenue Service (t(IRS'') was an agency of the United States Department of the Treasury responsible for enforcing and administering the tax laws , and ascertaining, computing, assessing and collecting income taxes owed to the United States. CO UNT 1 Conspiracy to Comm it Mail and Wire Fraud (18 U.S.C. 5 1349) 1. Paragraphs 1 through 9 of the General Allegations section of this Second Superseding Information are re-alleged and incomorated herein by reference. Beginning in or around January, 2003, and continuing until at least on or about April 18, 201 1, in Miami-Dade County, in the Southem Distrid of Florida, and elsewhere, the defendant, 3 of 11 Case 1:14-cr-20025-JEM Document 57 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/20/2014 Page 4 of 11 CARL FIORENTINO , did willfully, that is, with the intent to further the objectsof the conspiracy, and knowingly combine, conspire, confedeiate, and agree with Gilbert Fiorentino, E.K. and others known and unknown to the United States Attorney to commit certain offenses against the United States , that is: a) to knowingly and with intent to defraud, devise and intend to devise a scheme and artifke to defraud and to obtain money and property by means of materially false and fraudulent pretenses, representations, and promises, knowing that they were false and fraudulent when made, and knowingly causing to be delivered certain mail matter by U .S. mail and by private and commercial interstate carrier, according to the directions thereon, for the pum ose of executing the scheme, in violation of Title 18, United States Code, Section 1341; and b) to knowingly and with intent to defraud, devise and intend to devise a scheme and artifce to defraud, and to obtain money and property by means of materially false and fraudulent pretenses, representations, and promises, knowing that they were false and fraudulent when made, and transmitting and causing to be transmitted in interstate and foreign comm erce , by m eans of wire communication, certain m itings, signs, signals, pictures and sounds, for the purpose of executing the scheme and artitsce, in violation of Title 18, United States Code, Section 1343. PURPOSE OF- THE CON SPIRACY lt was a purpose of the conspiracy for CARL FIORENTINO and his conspirators to unlawfully emich themselves by concealing from the independent auditors and shareholders of Systemax, the receipt by CARL FIORENTINO and Gilbert Fiorentino of m onies and valuable goods and services from various vendors and third parties who did business 4 of 11 Case 1:14-cr-20025-JEM Document 57 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/20/2014 Page 5 of 11 with Systemax, and to not pay income taxes related to such monies, goods and services, so that CARIU FIORENTINO and Gilbert Fiorentino could keep the monies, goods and services for their own personal use and benefit, and certain conspirators could obtain and retain business with Systemax. M ANNER AND MEANS OF THE CONSPIM CY The manner and means by which the defendant and his conspirators sought to accomplish the objects and purpose of the conspiracy included, among others, the following: 4. CARIU FIORENTINO and Gilbert Fiorentino, along with their conspirators, agreed to receive undisclosed kickbacks and side payments from third parties, vendors and independent contractors who did business with TigerDirect and other TPG businesses of Systemax. ln exchange for such paymtnts, CARIU FIORENTINO and Gilbert Fiorentino directed business to the third party vendors who made such payments. CARIU FIORENTINO instructed the third parties to pay him directly and indirectly through intermedimies, in cash, or in a form that could not be easily traced or detected by Systemax or the IRS. 6. In the case of E.K. and his companies, CARL FIORENTINO and Gilbert Fiorentino caused TigerDirect to pay approximately $157 million between January 2003 and January 201 1, for computer and electronics components. During this time, E.K . paid CARL FIORENTINO and Gilbert Fiorentino kickbacks in the form of cash payments, indirect payments, gift cards, and the purchase of luxury items. ln total, E.K. paid kickbacks to CARIU FIORENTINO and Gilbert Fiorentino totaling more than $9 million, though the amounts paid to CARL FIORENTINO by E.K. were substantially greater than those paid to Gilbert Fiorentino. Kickback payments were made by E.K. to CARI, FIORENTINO in the form of interstate and international wire transfers, among other ways. E.K. and CARIU FIORENTINO 5 of 11 Case 1:14-cr-20025-JEM Document 57 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/20/2014 Page 6 of 11 coordinated kickback payments using personal email accounts that would not be detected, and would send and receive interstate and intemational email comm unications between M iami, Florida and other states and countries. E.K. and CARL FIORENTINO caused to be delivered in the U.S. m ail, various documents and communieations related to the scheme, including invoices from third parties that provided goods or services to CARL FIORENTINO but for which E.K. paid directly as a fonn of kickback. 8. CARL FIORENTINO demanded and obtained kickbacks from other vendors who did business with TigerDixect, and demanded that these payments be made in the form of cash, direct payments for goods or services, or other forms. 9. Between 2005 and 201 1, CARL FIORENTINO and Gilbert Fiorentino signed conflict of interest questionnaires in which they falsely and fraudulently concealed from Systemax their receipt of cash, and other remuneration from vendors who did business with Systemax. Gilbert Fiorentino regularly met with the independent auditors of Systemax at the offices of TigerDirect in M iami, while the auditors were conducting quarterly reviews and annual audits of the company.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Shirking, Opportunism, Self-Delusion and More: the Agency Problem Today Jayne W
    College of William & Mary Law School William & Mary Law School Scholarship Repository Faculty Publications Faculty and Deans 2013 Shirking, Opportunism, Self-Delusion and More: The Agency Problem Today Jayne W. Barnard William & Mary Law School, [email protected] Repository Citation Barnard, Jayne W., "Shirking, Opportunism, Self-Delusion and More: The Agency Problem Today" (2013). Faculty Publications. 1720. https://scholarship.law.wm.edu/facpubs/1720 Copyright c 2013 by the authors. This article is brought to you by the William & Mary Law School Scholarship Repository. https://scholarship.law.wm.edu/facpubs SHIRKING, OPPORTUNISM, SELF-DELUSION AND MORE: THE AGENCY PROBLEM LIVES ON Jayne W. Barnard* One would think, after nearly a century of effort to limit the self-serving and wealth-destroying practices of corporate executives and their board of directors, Americans could finally feel confident that the goals of corporate leaders were now fully aligned with those of their investors.' We should now be able to observe these men and women acting with integrity, diligence, and grace. Investor anxiety about shirking, opportunism, self-promotion, and outsized greed should be, one would think, an artifact of the past. Alas, we cannot say we have achieved that enlightened state of affairs. It is still all too possible to find evidence of executive sloth, corruption, mendacity, and hubris. All the gatekeepers, media scoldings, scholarly inquiries, and judicial sermons aimed at curbing the agency problem have failed to restrain the worst in human impulses. Should we be surprised? In thinking about the failures of the law and the culture of business to counteract the predictable weaknesses (and sometimes worse) of human beings, several high-profile examples quickly come to mind: Richard Fuld of Lehman Brothers, Jon Corzine of MF Global Holdings, Ken Lewis of Bank of America, Angelo Mozilo of Countrywide Financial, Aubrey McClendon of Chesapeake Energy, and Rajat Gupta of McKinsey and Goldman Sachs.
    [Show full text]
  • 1 in the United States District Court for the Eastern
    Case 6:10-cv-00676-LED Document 2 Filed 12/16/10 Page 1 of 32 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS TYLER DIVISION GUARDIAN MEDIA TECHNOLOGIES, LTD., Plaintiff, v. (1) ACER AMERICA CORPORATION; (2) APEX DIGITAL, INC.; (3) AT&T INC.; (4) CONN’S INC.; (5) FUJITSU AMERICA, INC.; (6) FUJITSU LIMITED; (7) GAMESTOP CORP.; (8) HAIER AMERICA TRADING, L.L.C.; CIVIL ACTION NO. ___________ (9) HISENSE USA CORPORATION; (10) HOPPER RADIO OF FLORIDA, INC.; (11) IMATION CORP.; (12) J & R ELECTRONICS INC.; (13) LASONIC ELECTRONICS JURY TRIAL DEMANDED CORPORATION; (14) LENOVO (UNITED STATES) INC.; (15) MEMOREX PRODUCTS, INC.; (16) MICRO CENTER SALES CORPORATION; (17) MICROSOFT CORPORATION; (18) MOTOROLA, INC.; (19) OFFICE DEPOT, INC.; (20) ON CORP US, INC.; (21) PROTON INTERNATIONAL AMERICA, INC.; (22) PROTRON DIGITAL CORPORATION; (23) RENT-A-CENTER, INC.; (24) ROBERT BOSCH, LLC; (25) SKYWORTH ELECTRONICS, INC.; (26) SOUND AROUND INC.; (27) STAPLES, INC.; (28) STARLITE CONSUMER ELECTRONICS (USA) INC.; (29) STARLITE INTERNATIONAL HOLDINGS, LTD.; (30) TATUNG COMPANY OF AMERICA, INC.; 1 Case 6:10-cv-00676-LED Document 2 Filed 12/16/10 Page 2 of 32 (31) TIGERDIRECT, INC.; (32) TIVO INC.; (33) TTE TECHNOLOGY, INC.; (34) VERIZON COMMUNICATIONS INC.; (35) VIDEOLAND, LLC; AND (36) VIEWSONIC CORPORATION. Defendants. ORIGINAL COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT Plaintiff GUARDIAN MEDIA TECHNOLOGIES, LTD. files this Original Complaint against the above-named Defendants, alleging as follows: PARTIES 1. Guardian Media Technologies, Ltd. (“Guardian”) is a Texas limited partnership. Guardian has its principal place of business in Longview, TX. 2. Upon information and belief, Defendant Acer America Corporation (“Acer”) is a corporation organized and existing under the laws of the State of California with its principal place of business located at 333 West San Carlos Street, Suite 1500, San Jose, California 95110.
    [Show full text]
  • Case 1:14-Cr-20854-JEM Document 25 Entered on FLSD Docket 02/11/2015 Page 1 of 26
    Case 1:14-cr-20854-JEM Document 25 Entered on FLSD Docket 02/11/2015 Page 1 of 26 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA CASE № 14-20854-CR-MARTINEZ UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff, vs. GILBERT FIORENTINO, Defendant, ___________________________/ DEFENDANT GILBERT FIORENTINO’S RESPONSE TO THE PRESENTENCE INVESTIGATION REPORT AND REQUEST FOR AN ALTERNATIVE SENTENCE The Defendant, GILBERT FIORENTINO, by and through his undersigned counsel, and pursuant to U.S.S.G. § 6A1.2-3, p.s., Fed. R. Crim. P. 32 (d), (e)(2) and (f), and the Fifth and Sixth Amendments to the United States Constitution, respectfully file this Response to the Presentence Investigation Report (hereafter “PSR”) and Request for an Alternative Sentence, and as grounds therefore state as follows: I. INTRODUCTION Pursuant to U.S. v. Booker, 543 U.S. 220 (2005), the federal sentencing process has adopted a three-step approach. See Fed. R. Crim. P. 11(M), amended December 1, 2007, U.S. v. Pugh, 515 F.3d 1179 (11th Cir. 2008); and, most recently, Amendment 741 of the Sentencing Guidelines, effective November 1, 2010. First, the Court is to resolve any disputed guideline issues and determine the advisory guideline range. In MR. FIORENTINO’S case, the parties agree that pursuant to paragraphs 9 and 10 of the written Plea Agreement § 2B1.1 of the Sentencing Guidelines is the applicable guideline. Therefore, the base offense level in this case is 6, which is increased based upon the Page 1 of 26 Law Offices of Samuel J. Rabin, Jr., P.A., 800 Brickell Avenue, Suite 1400, Miami, FL 33131, Telephone (305) 358-1064 Case 1:14-cr-20854-JEM Document 25 Entered on FLSD Docket 02/11/2015 Page 2 of 26 amount of loss, the use of sophisticated means and MR.
    [Show full text]
  • CITY of SOUTH MIAMI Vendor Listing by Vendor Name
    CITY OF SOUTH MIAMI Vendor Listing by Vendor Name Report Date:11/27/2013 PE ID PE Name 1099 EIN Status 0002954 @ Comm Corporation N AC 0003951 @XI COMPUTER CORP. N AC 0004764 1-866-JUNK-BE-GONE/MIAMI N AC 0000308 10-S SUPPLY N AC 0004997 12 AVENUE COPY SERVICE INC N 59-1950226 AC 0002003 1999 APWA ANNUAL MEETING N AC 0001091 20/20 INSIGHTS INC. Y 65-0505147 AC 0002648 2000 JUNIOR ORANGE BOWL PARADE N AC 0001491 20TH CENTURY PLASTICS N 95-2084551 AC 0002630 3 CMA MEMBERSHIP N AC 0005512 33143 N AC 0001465 500 ROLE MODELS OF EXCELLENCE PROJ. N AC 0004684 911 RESTORATION INC N AC 0000846 A & C CLEANING SERVICE N 0 AC 0004713 A & D FENCING SPECIALIST N 65-0904958 AC 0006006 A & Q FENCE CORPORATION N 65-0835598 AC 0001186 A & R CONCRETE PRODUCTS N AC 0000186 A ABBEY LOCKSMITH CO N AC 0000620 A ADVANCED FIRE N 0 AC 0000623 A B DICK COMPANY N 0 AC 0001500 A BEKA BOOK INC N AC 0005939 A BETTER AIM SEPTIC N 0 AC 0001990 A CONCEPT IN BRONZE INC N AC 0000621 A DRAIN ALL INC N 0 AC 0003889 A FANTASY JUMP N AC 0001041 A KID''S PARTY EXPRESS N 65-0250719 AC 0000616 A LIKELY STORY N 0 AC 0000203 A NAVAS PARTY PRODUCTION N AC 0000619 A SECOND CHANCE INC. N 0 AC 0001312 A T & T N AC 0001593 A T & T N AC 0000622 A TEAM OFFICE PRODUCTS N 0 AC 0003578 A WILLETS-O''NEIL COMPANY N AC 0001405 A WOMAN''S TOUCH STUDIO N 0 AC 0000617 A&C CLEANING SERVICE N 0 AC 0002471 A&D QUALITY LANDSCAPING CORP.
    [Show full text]
  • OSF Vendor File
    PE ID PE Name 2954 @ COMM CORPORATION 3951 @XI COMPUTER CORP. 4764 1‐866‐JUNK‐BE‐GONE/MIAMI 308 10‐S SUPPLY 4997 12 AVENUE COPY SERVICE INC 2648 2000 JUNIOR ORANGE BOWL PARADE 1491 20TH CENTURY PLASTICS 2630 3 CMA MEMBERSHIP 1465 500 ROLE MODELS OF EXCELLENCE PROJ. 4684 911 RESTORATION INC 146 A & A LAWNMORE SERVICE 846 A & C CLEANING SERVICE 4713 A & D FENCING SPECIALIST 6006 A & Q FENCE CORPORATION 1186 A & R CONCRETE PRODUCTS 210 A AABAN LOCKSMITH INC 186 A ABBEY LOCKSMITH CO 620 A ADVANCED FIRE 623 A B DICK COMPANY 1500 A BEKA BOOK INC 5939 A BETTER AIM SEPTIC 1990 A CONCEPT IN BRONZE INC 621 A DRAIN ALL INC 3889 A FANTASY JUMP 1041 A KID''S PARTY EXPRESS 616 A LIKELY STORY 203 A NAVAS PARTY PRODUCTION 619 A SECOND CHANCE INC. 1312 A T & T 1593 A T & T 316 A T & T DO NOT USE"" 622 A TEAM OFFICE PRODUCTS 311 A UNIFORM & SHOE SUPERMARKET 3578 A WILLETS‐O''NEIL COMPANY 1405 A WOMAN''S TOUCH STUDIO 617 A&C CLEANING SERVICE 2471 A&D QUALITY LANDSCAPING CORP. 6005 A‐1 FARGO VAN & STORAGE INC 3957 A‐1 KIDS PARTY EXPRESS 1266 A‐1‐A BOOKSTORE 1884 A‐1‐A EMPLOYMENT OF MIAMI 1234 A‐1‐A IDEAL BUSINESS MACHINES 271 A‐ADVANCED FIRE 2216 A‐TEAM OFFICE PRODUCTS 4171 A. PALMER ROOFING INC. 525 A.A. RUBBER STAMP & SEAL 5444 A.A.C.E. 6010 A.D.A. ENGINEERING INC 486 A.E. ROBERTS CO 804 A.J.
    [Show full text]
  • Systemax Inc
    SYSTEMAX INC FORM 10-K (Annual Report) Filed 04/01/02 for the Period Ending 12/31/01 Address 11 HARBOR PARK DR PORT WASHINGTON, NY 11050 Telephone 5166087000 CIK 0000945114 Symbol SYX SIC Code 5961 - Catalog and Mail-Order Houses Industry Retail (Catalog & Mail Order) Sector Services Fiscal Year 12/31 http://www.edgar-online.com © Copyright 2008, EDGAR Online, Inc. All Rights Reserved. Distribution and use of this document restricted under EDGAR Online, Inc. Terms of Use. SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION WASHINGTON, D.C. 20549 FORM 10-K (Mark One) [ X ] ANNUAL REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 or 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934 For the fiscal year ended December 31, 2001 or [ ] TRANSITION REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 or 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934 For the transition period from to Commission File Number: 1-13792 SYSTEMAX INC. (Exact name of registrant as specified in its charter) DELAWARE 11-3262067 (State or other jurisdiction of (I.R.S. Employer incorporation or organization) Identification No.) 22 HARBOR PARK DRIVE PORT WASHINGTON, NEW YORK 11050 (Address of principal executive offices) (Zip Code) REGISTRANT'S TELEPHONE NUMBER, INCLUDING AREA CODE: (516) 608-7000 SECURITIES REGISTERED PURSUANT TO SECTION 12(B) OF THE ACT: NAME OF EACH EXCHANGE ON TITLE OF EACH CLASS WHICH REGISTERED ------------------- ----------------- Common Stock, par value $ .01 per share New York Stock Exchange SECURITIES REGISTERED PURSUANT TO SECTION 12(G) OF THE ACT: NONE Indicate by check mark whether the registrant (1) has filed all reports required to be filed by Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to file such reports), and (2) has been subject to such filing requirements for the past 90 days.
    [Show full text]
  • IN the UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT for the EASTERN DISTRICT of TEXAS TYLER DIVISION ADJUSTACAM LLC, § § Plaintiff, § § Vs
    Case 6:10-cv-00329-JRG Document 762 Filed 08/20/13 Page 1 of 3 PageID #: 9508 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS TYLER DIVISION ADJUSTACAM LLC, § § Plaintiff, § § vs. § CASE NO. 6:10-CV-329 § AMAZON.COM, INC., et al, § § Defendants. § FINAL JUDGMENT Pursuant to the Orders granting the parties’ Joint Motions to Dismiss, the Court hereby enters Final Judgment. Plaintiff Adjustacam LLC filed suit against fifty-nine Defendants in this case on July 2, 2012. Since that time, all Defendants have been dismissed: Amazon.com, Inc. (Docket No. 630); Auditek Corporation (Docket No. 647); Blue Microphones, LLC (Docket No. 492); Baltic Latvian Universal Electronics, LLC d/b/a Blue Microphones, LLC d/b/a Blue Microphone (Docket No. 492); CDW Corporation f/k/a CDW Computer Centers, Inc. (Docket No. 658); CDW, Inc. (Docket No. 658); CDW, LLC (Docket No. 10); Compusa.com, Inc. (Docket No. 620); Cobra Digital, LLC (Docket No. 420); Creative Technology Ltd. (Docket No. 348); Creative Labs, Inc. (Docket No. 560); Dell, Inc. (Docket No. 563); Digital Innovations, LLC (Docket No. 651); Eastman Kodak Company (Docket No. 217); Ezonics Corporation d/ba/ Ezonics Corporation USA d/b/a Ezonics (Docket No. 361); Fry’s Electronics Inc. (Docket No. 675); Gear Head, LLC (Docket No. 665); General Electric Company (Docket No. 8); Hewlett- Packard Company (Docket No. 677); Incomex, Inc. (Docket No. 342); Jasco Products Company LLC d/b/a Jasco Products Company d/b/a Jasco (Docket No. 410); Jwin Electronics Corporation (Docket No. 419); Klip Extreme LLC (Docket No.
    [Show full text]
  • Print, MGA Entertainment, Digital Domain, Tigerdirect, Hurley, Billabong, Samsung, and Many Others
    Kent R. Raygor Partner T: +1.310.228.3730 1901 Avenue of the Stars F: +1.310.228.3930 Suite 1600 [email protected] Los Angeles, CA 90067 Kent Raygor, a partner in the Century City office, practices in the Business Trial, Intellectual Property, and Entertainment Technology and Advertising groups. Areas of Practice Complex business litigation: Kent handles complex litigation, including class actions and multidistrict litigation, appearing before state and federal trial courts around the country, including the California Courts of Appeal and Supreme Court, Multidistrict Litigation Panel, Ninth Circuit and Federal Circuit Courts of Appeals, and U.S. Supreme Court. ■ Business litigation: Corporate management and partnership disputes in the hedge fund, venture capital, banking, and other industries; consumer class actions, including cases for Gillette, Pier 1, and MillerCoors; complex, high-tech patent litigation for Honeywell, Northrop Grumman, and others; cases with significant constitutional issues arising under the First Amendment, the Reserved Powers Doctrine, Contracts, Equal Protection, and Privacy provisions; multidistrict litigation (MDL) defending clients against numerous copyright, unfair competition, and consumer class action lawsuits consolidated before a single court. ■ Media law litigation and counseling: Emphasis on contract, licensing, distribution, sponsorship, First Amendment, privacy, defamation, and right of publicity litigation; pre-publication clearance analyses for films, documentaries, screenplays, advertising, books, news, and web and mobile content; complex matters for many Fortune 500 companies, including Fox, Disney, ABC, ESPN, Lions Gate, CNET, and Sony Pictures; numerous right of publicity and invasion of privacy cases defending clients against claims by celebrities, including Brad Pitt, Jennifer Aniston, Catherine Zeta-Jones, Dianne Keaton, Michelle Pfeiffer, Arnold Schwarzenegger, Cameron Diaz, Audioslave, Weezer, Bruce Willis, Denzel Washington, Kate Hudson, Zooey Deschanel, and Sandra Bullock.
    [Show full text]
  • Circuit City: the Formula of Past Successes Can’T Be Forever
    This material is exclusively prepared for Ringle Customers Material for your English session Circuit City: The formula of past successes can’t be forever [source: https://asia.nikkei.com/Spotlight/Cover-Story/How-Asian-companies-are-navigating-the-trade-war] 0 본 자료는 저작권 법에 의해 보호되는 저작물로, Ringle 사에 저작권이 존재합니다. 해당 자료에 대한 무단 복제/배포를 금하며, 해당 자료로 수익을 얻거나 이에 상응하는 혜택을 누릴 시 Ringle 과 사전 협의가 없는 경우 고소/고발 조치 될 수 있습니다. This material is exclusively prepared for Ringle Customers [Summary in English] I. Circuit City Circuit City, once the top retailer of electronics in America, failed to adapt to a changing market economy. Clinging to its past successes and old strategies, Circuit City eventually declared bankruptcy in 2008. • Once a Fortune 500 company and America’s leading retailer of electronics, Circuit City (CC) repeatedly failed to address the company’s internal issues and made poor business decisions, ultimately losing out in every aspect to their innovative competitor, Best Buy. CC obstinately persisted in their old formulas for success, not anticipating how quickly e-commerce companies and competing distributors would encroach on their market. Though CC had once been one of the most innovative companies in North America with 1,500 stores across the U.S. and Canada, they filed for bankruptcy protection in 2008. • Having been unable to find a buyer to take over the bankrupt company after a year, CC sold its assets to Systemax for $14M. Systemax also acquired CompUSA and opened tigerdirect.com, after which CC almost completely disappeared into history.
    [Show full text]
  • 1 in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas Tyler Division Consolidated Work Station Computing, Llc
    IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS TYLER DIVISION CONSOLIDATED WORK STATION COMPUTING, LLC, Plaintiff, CIVIL ACTION NO. 6:11-CV-696 v. ORIGINAL COMPLAINT FOR (1) ACER AMERICA CORPORATION; PATENT INFRINGEMENT (2) CDW CORPORATION; (3) CYBERTRON INTERNATIONAL JURY TRIAL DEMANDED INC.; (4) EGENERA, INC.; (5) FREEDOM USA, INC. dba AVADIRECT CUSTOM COMPUTERS; (6) FUJITSU AMERICA, INC.; (7) HEWLETT-PACKARD COMPANY; (8) HUAWEI TECHNOLOGIES USA INC.; (9) MCAFEE, INC.; (10) NEC CORPORATION OF AMERICA; (11) NEXT INTERNATIONAL, INC.; (12) PC CONNECTION EXPRESS, INC.; (13) PC MALL, INC.; (14) SIGNAL MICRO SYSTEMS, INC.; (15) SUPER MICRO COMPUTER, INC.; (16) TIGERDIRECT, INC.; and (17) UNIQUE DIGITAL TECHNOLOGY, INC.; Defendants. Plaintiff CONSOLIDATED WORK STATION COMPUTING, LLC files this Original Complaint against the above-named defendants, based on its own knowledge with respect to itself and its own actions and based on information and belief as to all other matters, as follows: 1 PARTIES 1. Consolidated Work Station Computing, LLC (“CWSC”) is a Texas limited liability company. 2. Defendant Acer America Corporation (“Acer”) is a corporation organized and existing under the laws of the State of California with a principal place of business located at 333 West San Carlos Street, Suite 1500, San Jose, California 95110. Acer can be served via its registered agent for service of process: CT Corporation System, 350 N. St. Paul St., Suite 2900; Dallas, Texas 75201-4234. 3. Defendant CDW Corporation (“CDW”) is a corporation organized and existing under the laws of the State of Delaware with a principal place of business located at 200 N.
    [Show full text]
  • Gilbert Fiorentino
    Case 1:14-cr-20854-MGC Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/20/2014 Page 1 of 12TB Nov 20, 2014 UNITED STATES DISTRICT CO URT SO UTH ERN DISTRICT OF FLO RIDA 14-20854-CR-COOKE/TORRES CASE NO . 18 U.S.C. j 371 18 U.S.C. j 981(a)(1)(C) UNITED STATES OF AM ERICA VS. GILBERT FIORENTINO , Defendant. / INFO RM ATION The United States Attorney charges that: GENERAL ALLEGATIONS At times material to this Infonnation: Systemax, lnc. (ltsystemax'') was a Delaware corporation with its principal place of business inPort W ashington, New York. Systemax sold personal computers and other consumer electronics through its websites, retail stores and direct mail catalogs. In tiscal year 2010, Systemax had annual sales revenue of approximately $3.6 billion. Systemax was a public company and its comm on stock was traded on the New York Stock Exchange . Systemax was an issuer with a clmss of securities registered pursuant to Section 12 of the Securities and Exchange Act of 1934, and it was obligated to tile reports with the U .S. Securities and Exchange Commission ($1SEC'') pursuant to Section 15(d) of the Act. TigerDirect was a subsidiary of Systemax with its principal place of business in M iami, Florida. TigerDirect was a part of the Technology Products Group ($1TPG'') of Case 1:14-cr-20854-MGC Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/20/2014 Page 2 of 12 Systemax. TPG marketed and sold technology products under several brand names, including TigerDirect, COmPUSA, and Circuit City. Defendant GILBERT FIORENTINO was a resident of Miami, Florida, the Chief Executive Officer of TPG and TigerDirect, and a member of the Board of Directors of Systemax.
    [Show full text]
  • Systemax Inc. (Exact Name of Registrant As Specified in Its Charter)
    SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION WASHINGTON, D.C. 20549 FORM 10-K (Mark One) ☒ ANNUAL REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 or 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934 For the fiscal year ended December 31, 2015 or ☐ TRANSITION REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 or 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934 For the transition period from to Commission File Number: 1-13792 Systemax Inc. (Exact name of registrant as specified in its charter) Delaware 11-3262067 (State or other jurisdiction of incorporation or organization) (I.R.S. Employer Identification No.) 11 Harbor Park Drive Port Washington, New York 11050 (Address of principal executive offices, including zip code) Registrant’s telephone number, including area code: (516) 608-7000 Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(b) of the Act: Title of each class Name of each exchange on which registered Common Stock, par value $ .01 per share New York Stock Exchange Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(g) of the Act: NONE Indicate by check mark if the registrant is a well-known seasoned issuer, as defined in Rule 405 of the Securities Act. Yes ☐ No ☒ Indicate by check mark if the registrant is not required to file reports pursuant to Section 13 or Section 15(d) of the Act. Yes ☐ No ☒ Indicate by check mark whether the registrant (1) has filed all reports required to be filed by Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to file such reports), and (2) has been subject to such filing requirements for the past 90 days.
    [Show full text]